Question textSection F: Read the text on development in Australian cities and answer the following questions.1. Australian governments have historically focused on building and expanding the cities. The need to provide housing for more people is the reason given for expanding cities out and up, but it is in fact the taxes s that flow from land transfers and construction that push forward the endless development of Melbourne and Sydney, in particular. Property development is the single largest contributor to Victorian and New South Wales’ government funds.2. Since 2020, city councils have been understandably anxious to attract people back to their centres. Their expectations of constant growth in the number of students and workers returning from overseas may be based more on hope than reason. The causes of population growth are more uncertain, and Australia can no longer depend on global migration at previous levels. Birth rates are falling across the developed world and online international education is expanding. However, cities do not have to become larger to evolve. Instead, Australia must become less reliant on importing skilled workers, students and materials. It would be preferable to make more effective use of local resources and produce much more of what is needed locally.3. Australian cities have the potential to be great. They have amazing cultural scenes. Their biomedical capabilities are among the world’s best, and their education sector remains exportable online and via existing overseas campuses. The local manufacturing sector still has a base to build on and provide more of the products Australians need. The renewable energy capacity is unlimited. It is possible to invest in research and development and maintain wealth through innovation and production, rather than the endless consumption of land.4. Adapting to changing conditions means rethinking not just what and how cities are built, but why. Before allocating land for yet more housing estates, for example, it is important to consider the fact that a million homes, 10% of Australia’s housing stock, were empty in 2022. The national survey found that there were nearly 600,000 unoccupied homes in Victoria and New South Wales. For years research has demonstrated that high numbers of vacant homes were unavailable for rent. Implementing higher taxes on homes left vacant would lead to many more of them being released onto the rental market.5. The argument that the only way to make housing more affordable is to build more homes has been repeatedly refuted by years of careful research. Tens of thousands of homes have been added to the inner cities of Melbourne and Sydney over the past 20 year. However, average prices have not decreased. While prices of high-end apartments might drop a little when rental vacancy rates increase, apartment developers are alert to any dip in profits. At the slightest hint of a surplus, they stop building. If the object of urban expansion is housing affordability, the only way to achieve it is to build social housing for low-income earners. More than enough land is available within the urban growth boundaries for residential development.6. The abundance of vacant blocks of land in Australian cities presents an opportunity for urban planning to address the lack of affordable homes. Recent research shows there are 84,000 undeveloped housing blocks in Australian cities. This does not include the many inner-city regeneration projects under way. Social housing available for low-income earners to rent in these areas should be the focus of urban planning before any more land is released.7. Unlike these vacant privately-owned blocks, some believe that the land currently occupied by industry should be developed for housing. However, much of this land is low-lying and has been found to be unsuitable for housing. This is mainly due to occasional flooding, which is not necessarily a problem for industry. It would not be wise, and the expense would be high to build housing there. In addition, due to weaknesses in global supply lines, the need for sustainable local production is higher than ever. The diminishing industrial lands should be preserved for industry.8. This is not an argument for decreasing construction: there is much work to be done updating existing buildings. These need new exteriors, more effective air flow, and passive cooling to adapt to the warming climate. A forward-looking city plan would consolidate and upgrade the structures already in place. That is the way to increase investment in the inner-city areas that is environmentally, socially and politically sustainable. (719 words)Questions 19–22. Which paragraph contains the following supporting information? Match the information to the paragraph number. 19. A description of some of the resources that can be utilised for development 20. An example that demonstrates how building new homes does not reduce costs 21. Evidence that there are enough homes to ease the current housing crisis 22. The author’s view on how to use blocks of land that have not been developedParagraph 1Paragraph 2Paragraph 3Paragraph 4Paragraph 5Paragraph 6Paragraph 7Paragraph 819. Answer 1 Question 10[select: , Paragraph 1, Paragraph 2, Paragraph 3, Paragraph 4, Paragraph 5, Paragraph 6, Paragraph 7, Paragraph 8]20. Answer 2 Question 10[select: , Paragraph 1, Paragraph 2, Paragraph 3, Paragraph 4, Paragraph 5, Paragraph 6, Paragraph 7, Paragraph 8]21. Answer 3 Question 10[select: , Paragraph 1, Paragraph 2, Paragraph 3, Paragraph 4, Paragraph 5, Paragraph 6, Paragraph 7, Paragraph 8]22. Answer 4 Question 10[select: , Paragraph 1, Paragraph 2, Paragraph 3, Paragraph 4, Paragraph 5, Paragraph 6, Paragraph 7, Paragraph 8]多项填空题

题目图片

登录即可查看完整答案

我们收录了全球超50000道真实原题与详细解析,现在登录,立即获得答案。

类似问题

Section F: Read the text on the four-day working week and answer the following questions. 1. The concept of a four-day work week, where employees keep 100% of their salary and work 80% of their former hours while maintaining 100% productivity, has gained global attention. It is called the 100:80:100 model. Successful productivity in this model has been defined as an increase of approximately 20% in productivity per employee per hour worked. Various trials have been conducted to assess whether this model is practical and has significant benefits. The trials to date have been conducted on small and medium-sized organisations only. They indicate positive outcomes for both employers and employees across various industries. However, challenges, and the need for further trials will determine if the model should be adjusted to fit most, if not all business sectors. 2. These initiatives are most often led by management. They are aimed at addressing employee burnout, boosting productivity, and attracting and retaining the best possible employees. A number of companies which were using the model were surveyed, and no loss of productivity was found. In fact, 70% of the companies surveyed reported higher productivity levels than before the change. Additionally, improvements in recruitment and retention of employees were noted in 60% of the surveyed companies. The most welcome outcome was that 50% of the companies surveyed reported significant reductions in absenteeism, or the regular absence from work without a proper reason. 3. The additional day off provides employees with time for relaxation and recovery. Employees feel less stressed and experience reduced burnout. The four-day work week helps alleviate work-family conflicts and mitigate the Sunday-evening anxiety associated with the approaching start to the working week. Given the high levels of stress in workplaces, these findings have significant implications for employee wellbeing. Similar outcomes were experienced by employees with a permanent scheduled long weekend as well as those who had a break in the middle of their working week. 4. Despite the reported benefits, some organisations have faced challenges when implementing a four-day work week. A significant barrier is the reluctant feelings top managers can have when considering implementing the model. The main obstacle remains the fear that fewer hours worked would lead to lower productivity. To address these concerns, it is essential to gather evidence from trials, including large-scale international trials involving diverse industries. Additional evidence of the model’s success will calm the critics and lead to broader acceptance. 5. There are questions about whether this model is appropriate for application across all sectors of the economy. As yet, technology companies have most commonly adopted the model. There is some concern that their positive experiences may not directly translate to other sectors, for example manufacturing, which requires machines to keep running, a trade counter open to the public and around-the-clock deliveries. Manufacturing workers do not have the option of working from home, as there always needs to be a minimum number of staff on site. Public services also have different business profiles and demands. In these sectors reduced working hours may require overtime payments or additional staffing, which would not be acceptable to most employers. 6. Many firms which have implemented the model have achieved a significant gain in productivity per employee per hour worked. However, it is not clear if these gains in productivity are sustainable for the long term. They require employees to work more intensely, which may not be feasible for employees to maintain over the length of their careers. 7. It is likely that the four-day work week will gradually spread to workplaces and sectors with realistic productivity gains. Employers and sectors that do not offer reduced hours will eventually face difficulties attracting and retaining high-quality employees. They will be forced to reduce work hours so as to continue to run a competitive business. However, the pace of such changes will depend on economic growth, productivity trends, and labour market conditions. 8. The concept of a four-day work week has attracted attention and provided positive outcomes. International companies have displayed the potential benefits of reduced hours in terms of productivity, employee wellbeing and recruitment and retention of key employees. However, challenges remain, including the uncertainty of managers and considerations relating to certain sectors. Continued trials, involving diverse industries, missing from the original trials, will provide valuable insights for decision-makers considering the adoption of the 100:80:100 model. Questions 25 – 29 Complete this summary of the last two paragraphs of the text by filling in each blank with ONE WORD from the text. The 100:80:100 model will most likely 25. Answer Question 13[input] to more fields of work with productivity improvements. Businesses which continue with the traditional working week could have 26. _____ , and may be forced to agree to the model. They would need to do this to stay 27. _____ . The advantages of a reduced working week have been revealed by 28. _____businesses. Future trials of the concept must include those 29. ____ not surveyed in the first

Question textSection F: Read the text on the four-day working week and answer the following questions. 1. The concept of a four-day work week, where employees keep 100% of their salary and work 80% of their former hours while maintaining 100% productivity, has gained global attention. It is called the 100:80:100 model. Successful productivity in this model has been defined as an increase of approximately 20% in productivity per employee per hour worked. Various trials have been conducted to assess whether this model is practical and has significant benefits. The trials to date have been conducted on small and medium-sized organisations only. They indicate positive outcomes for both employers and employees across various industries. However, challenges, and the need for further trials will determine if the model should be adjusted to fit most, if not all business sectors. 2. These initiatives are most often led by management. They are aimed at addressing employee burnout, boosting productivity, and attracting and retaining the best possible employees. A number of companies which were using the model were surveyed, and no loss of productivity was found. In fact, 70% of the companies surveyed reported higher productivity levels than before the change. Additionally, improvements in recruitment and retention of employees were noted in 60% of the surveyed companies. The most welcome outcome was that 50% of the companies surveyed reported significant reductions in absenteeism, or the regular absence from work without a proper reason. 3. The additional day off provides employees with time for relaxation and recovery. Employees feel less stressed and experience reduced burnout. The four-day work week helps alleviate work-family conflicts and mitigate the Sunday-evening anxiety associated with the approaching start to the working week. Given the high levels of stress in workplaces, these findings have significant implications for employee wellbeing. Similar outcomes were experienced by employees with a permanent scheduled long weekend as well as those who had a break in the middle of their working week. 4. Despite the reported benefits, some organisations have faced challenges when implementing a four-day work week. A significant barrier is the reluctant feelings top managers can have when considering implementing the model. The main obstacle remains the fear that fewer hours worked would lead to lower productivity. To address these concerns, it is essential to gather evidence from trials, including large-scale international trials involving diverse industries. Additional evidence of the model’s success will calm the critics and lead to broader acceptance. 5. There are questions about whether this model is appropriate for application across all sectors of the economy. As yet, technology companies have most commonly adopted the model. There is some concern that their positive experiences may not directly translate to other sectors, for example manufacturing, which requires machines to keep running, a trade counter open to the public and around-the-clock deliveries. Manufacturing workers do not have the option of working from home, as there always needs to be a minimum number of staff on site. Public services also have different business profiles and demands. In these sectors reduced working hours may require overtime payments or additional staffing, which would not be acceptable to most employers. 6. Many firms which have implemented the model have achieved a significant gain in productivity per employee per hour worked. However, it is not clear if these gains in productivity are sustainable for the long term. They require employees to work more intensely, which may not be feasible for employees to maintain over the length of their careers. 7. It is likely that the four-day work week will gradually spread to workplaces and sectors with realistic productivity gains. Employers and sectors that do not offer reduced hours will eventually face difficulties attracting and retaining high-quality employees. They will be forced to reduce work hours so as to continue to run a competitive business. However, the pace of such changes will depend on economic growth, productivity trends, and labour market conditions. 8. The concept of a four-day work week has attracted attention and provided positive outcomes. International companies have displayed the potential benefits of reduced hours in terms of productivity, employee wellbeing and recruitment and retention of key employees. However, challenges remain, including the uncertainty of managers and considerations relating to certain sectors. Continued trials, involving diverse industries, missing from the original trials, will provide valuable insights for decision-makers considering the adoption of the 100:80:100 model. Questions 19–22. Which paragraphs contain the following supporting information? Match the information to the paragraph number.19. An explanation of when the extra day off could be takenAnswer 1 Question 10[select: , Paragraph 1, Paragraph 2, Paragraph 3, Paragraph 4, Paragraph 5, Paragraph 6, Paragraph 7, Paragraph 8]20. An explanation of why improved productivity may not be maintained over time.Answer 2 Question 10[select: , Paragraph 1, Paragraph 2, Paragraph 3, Paragraph 4, Paragraph 5, Paragraph 6, Paragraph 7, Paragraph 8]21. Data to support the success of the model. Answer 3 Question 10[select: , Paragraph 1, Paragraph 2, Paragraph 3, Paragraph 4, Paragraph 5, Paragraph 6, Paragraph 7, Paragraph 8] 22. Reasons that the model is unlikely to be suitable for an industry.Answer 4 Question 10[select: , Paragraph 1, Paragraph 2, Paragraph 3, Paragraph 4, Paragraph 5, Paragraph 6, Paragraph 7, Paragraph 8]

Question textSection F: Read the text on the four-day working week and answer the following questions. 1. The concept of a four-day work week, where employees keep 100% of their salary and work 80% of their former hours while maintaining 100% productivity, has gained global attention. It is called the 100:80:100 model. Successful productivity in this model has been defined as an increase of approximately 20% in productivity per employee per hour worked. Various trials have been conducted to assess whether this model is practical and has significant benefits. The trials to date have been conducted on small and medium-sized organisations only. They indicate positive outcomes for both employers and employees across various industries. However, challenges, and the need for further trials will determine if the model should be adjusted to fit most, if not all business sectors. 2. These initiatives are most often led by management. They are aimed at addressing employee burnout, boosting productivity, and attracting and retaining the best possible employees. A number of companies which were using the model were surveyed, and no loss of productivity was found. In fact, 70% of the companies surveyed reported higher productivity levels than before the change. Additionally, improvements in recruitment and retention of employees were noted in 60% of the surveyed companies. The most welcome outcome was that 50% of the companies surveyed reported significant reductions in absenteeism, or the regular absence from work without a proper reason. 3. The additional day off provides employees with time for relaxation and recovery. Employees feel less stressed and experience reduced burnout. The four-day work week helps alleviate work-family conflicts and mitigate the Sunday-evening anxiety associated with the approaching start to the working week. Given the high levels of stress in workplaces, these findings have significant implications for employee wellbeing. Similar outcomes were experienced by employees with a permanent scheduled long weekend as well as those who had a break in the middle of their working week. 4. Despite the reported benefits, some organisations have faced challenges when implementing a four-day work week. A significant barrier is the reluctant feelings top managers can have when considering implementing the model. The main obstacle remains the fear that fewer hours worked would lead to lower productivity. To address these concerns, it is essential to gather evidence from trials, including large-scale international trials involving diverse industries. Additional evidence of the model’s success will calm the critics and lead to broader acceptance. 5. There are questions about whether this model is appropriate for application across all sectors of the economy. As yet, technology companies have most commonly adopted the model. There is some concern that their positive experiences may not directly translate to other sectors, for example manufacturing, which requires machines to keep running, a trade counter open to the public and around-the-clock deliveries. Manufacturing workers do not have the option of working from home, as there always needs to be a minimum number of staff on site. Public services also have different business profiles and demands. In these sectors reduced working hours may require overtime payments or additional staffing, which would not be acceptable to most employers. 6. Many firms which have implemented the model have achieved a significant gain in productivity per employee per hour worked. However, it is not clear if these gains in productivity are sustainable for the long term. They require employees to work more intensely, which may not be feasible for employees to maintain over the length of their careers. 7. It is likely that the four-day work week will gradually spread to workplaces and sectors with realistic productivity gains. Employers and sectors that do not offer reduced hours will eventually face difficulties attracting and retaining high-quality employees. They will be forced to reduce work hours so as to continue to run a competitive business. However, the pace of such changes will depend on economic growth, productivity trends, and labour market conditions. 8. The concept of a four-day work week has attracted attention and provided positive outcomes. International companies have displayed the potential benefits of reduced hours in terms of productivity, employee wellbeing and recruitment and retention of key employees. However, challenges remain, including the uncertainty of managers and considerations relating to certain sectors. Continued trials, involving diverse industries, missing from the original trials, will provide valuable insights for decision-makers considering the adoption of the 100:80:100 model. Questions 15–18. What is the author’s main point in each of these paragraphs? Choose from the list (a-g) below. There are 3 extra options. a. A drop in absenteeism was identified in half of the surveyed organisations. b. Improved mental health can be experienced by 100:80:100 model workers. c. In some areas, the model may need to be introduced slowly. d. More evidence is needed to strengthen support for the model. e. Some industries will never be suitable for the model. f. The model has been successful in the surveyed organisations. g. There are several reasons for companies to consider the model. 15. Paragraph 2 Answer 1 Question 9[select: , a. A drop in absenteeism was identified in half of the surveyed organisations., b. Improved mental health can be experienced by 100:80:100 model workers., c. In some areas, the model may need to be introduced slowly., d. More evidence is needed to strengthen support for the model., e. Some industries will never be suitable for the model., f. The model has been successful in the surveyed organisations., g. There are several reasons for companies to consider the model.]16. Paragraph 3 Answer 2 Question 9[select: , a. A drop in absenteeism was identified in half of the surveyed organisations., b. Improved mental health can be experienced by 100:80:100 model workers., c. In some areas, the model may need to be introduced slowly., d. More evidence is needed to strengthen support for the model., e. Some industries will never be suitable for the model., f. The model has been successful in the surveyed organisations., g. There are several reasons for companies to consider the model.]17. Paragraph 4 Answer 3 Question 9[select: , a. A drop in absenteeism was identified in half of the surveyed organisations., b. Improved mental health can be experienced by 100:80:100 model workers., c. In some areas, the model may need to be introduced slowly., d. More evidence is needed to strengthen support for the model., e. Some industries will never be suitable for the model., f. The model has been successful in the surveyed organisations., g. There are several reasons for companies to consider the model.]18. Paragraph 7 Answer 4 Question 9[select: , a. A drop in absenteeism was identified in half of the surveyed organisations., b. Improved mental health can be experienced by 100:80:100 model workers., c. In some areas, the model may need to be introduced slowly., d. More evidence is needed to strengthen support for the model., e. Some industries will never be suitable for the model., f. The model has been successful in the surveyed organisations., g. There are several reasons for companies to consider the model.]

Section D: Read this paragraph and answer the questions below Mobile phones were, on average, replaced every 18 months in the United States last year and the situation is similar for many electronic devices, such as computers and printers. This trend, which has grown significantly in the past two decades, is often due to ‘planned obsolescence.’ This phenomenon is a business strategy in which manufacturers design products to be obsolete, or unusable, in less time than is necessary. This is done so that, in the future, the consumer feels a need to purchase new products produced by the company to replace their old ones. Mobile phones are frequently updated with new features, which make older models seem unattractive or unfashionable to consumers. Products such as printers may also stop functioning after a set period of time. Repairing these items is generally less economical than buying new ones. Planned obsolescence is unsustainable as it produces large amounts of waste, which usually collects in landfills. Questions 10 – 11. Choose a, b, c or d as the best answer. 10. Why do people want to replace their devices?

更多留学生实用工具

加入我们，立即解锁 海量真题 与 独家解析，让复习快人一步！